One of the things I like most of Wikimania is reading people's notes
etc. about it, e.g. starting from
* https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Attendees
* https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges
* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimania_2016_presentations
(make sure to add yours!).
Having chaired the scholarship committee this year, I want to remind
everyone that the scholars are working on the outcomes of their
attendance, to be described or pointed to from
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars#Reports_from_2016
.
Whether you attended Wikimania or not, consulting this material is
useful; even more useful if you comment on the respective talk page. You
could point out what you found most interesting, or give suggestions on
how achievements could be further advanced (maybe with inspiration from
other attendees, current or past), or what else you'd like to see. Such
comments will be useful for the author of the report (and their
community), for other wikimaniacs and for next year's scholarship
committee too.
If you instead have comments on specific applications (or granted
scholarships), e.g. because you don't understand the committee's
decision, and you can't post them on any talk page, feel free to throw
them at me (e.g. at wikimania-scholarsh...@wikimedia.org ). I may reply
on your talk page, as my responses can't contain private information
anyway, and I can usually shed light on the thought process or the
mechanism which led to a certain outcome. Understanding the system is
necessary both to work with it as is and to change it; this is how I
interpret transparency.
Federico Leva
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
